The present methods and apparatuses relate in general to dropping a hockey puck. More specifically, the present methods and apparatuses relate to dropping a hockey puck to facilitate, simulate, or practice a hockey face-off.
A “face-off” is a significant part of the sport of hockey. In competition, a referee releases a hockey puck (also referred to as the “puck”) toward a playing surface between two opposing hockey players. Preferably, the puck is released such that it is relatively flat when it contacts the playing surface so that one player does not gain an advantage due to a peculiar bounce of an undesirably oriented puck. Once the puck is released, the players quickly vie for control of the puck. Accordingly, hockey players of all ages and skill levels earnestly seek to improve their face-off skills in order to “win” more face-offs.
A number of devices have been constructed to help hockey players practice face-offs without the need for an additional person to release the puck. However, these conventional devices do not provide robust convenience, portability, stability, or consistency. For example, some conventional devices must be connected to an external power source by a power cord. Such devices are not convenient for practicing at a typical ice rink where the nearest power source may be a significant distance away from a typical face-off position. Consequently, it is not uncommon for a lengthy power cord to be cumbersomely positioned across the playing surface. Further, at some practice locations, an external power source may not be readily available.
Other conventional devices are designed to be fixedly mounted to a support structure such as a wall. Such mounted devices have several shortcomings. For example, significant effort is often required to move a mounted device. Further, an owner of a typical ice rink facility, e.g., a governmental entity, may not allow a practice device to be mounted to the walls of the facility, even temporarily. Further still, a face-off next to a wall does not accurately simulate actual face-off situations that typically occur some distance from the wall of an ice rink. For example, if a device is mounted to a wall, the wall can obstruct the players' face-off options.
Some conventional devices are not stable. For example, some devices provide bases that are not large or sturdy enough to remain stable during a face-off. When players scramble to control a released puck, such devices may be easily tipped over, thereby interfering with the face-off. Further, lack of stability can cause the pucks to be dropped in an inconsistent manner, which inconsistencies can cause undesirable results. For example, a puck may be released at a non-flat angle, thereby causing the angled puck to take a peculiar bounce off of the playing surface. The peculiar bounce may unfairly bias the face-off in favor of one player.
Other conventional hockey practice devices are not designed to simulate a face-off. For example, many conventional devices are designed to propel pucks in a horizontal or generally non-vertical direction. Such devices do not simulate face-off situations, but instead provide practice for receiving or contacting pucks that are moving laterally over a playing or practice surface. In short, conventional hockey face-off practice devices do not provide robust convenience, portability, stability, or consistency.
The existing art does not teach or even suggest a solution to the challenges identified above. There is no motivation in the art to solve the problems identified above. Furthermore, the approaches of the existing art affirmatively teach away from a comprehensive solution to such obstacles.